ancient_paztriot

"I have ADD and so this is very hard." I read this and BURST OUT laughing! Came unexpected. /images/graemlins/frown.gif Quite a surprise there Theist! /images/graemlins/smile.gif The rest of your message did not seem serious to me. But really, I like laughing. Tell me more!

it's broadcast on the news, what could be the motive for a false rumor?

I looked at it. It's just too much for me to read through at this time. If you care to highlight some points? (I didn't read through this post I made either. I just remembered it's general content from before).

… the poorer classes that work for the rich endure the hardships of a very expensive environment… NO DOUBT; the cost of atmosphere and view THE RICH CHARGE FOR as if it was THEIR BUSINESS… for the ambiance? Did that make sense? (I felt serrenity there. Or at least some safety and calm… just passing through). I once bought a house in place that seemed nice on appearances. But I was unhappy after moving in. Next time I will rent in that area and "live there" before commiting myself. Theist once told me that… Now I understand.

How do the number of citizens survive in that area monitarily? Not everyone can be a clerk or business owner. Do they commute? (Be back shortly. I need to practice guitar).

Isn't Hridayananda at the LA temple? Spoken by a L.A. devotee that helped him move things out of his L.A. house… Hridayananda moved to San Louis Obisbos (whatever the spllng). He is doing extensive writing there on a KC related novel/possible screenplay to inspire the karmis. (Mahabharata translation is on hold because of this). He hopes to make money on it and start a KC farm in the same area also. ( It is half-way between L.A. and S.F. …on the coast!) The area is just beautiful! ........................... Now me… Hrydayananda is undoubtedly the most accomplished KC devotee in my eyes. I'm not saying liberated! But I may be wrong. It can happen in the flash of an eye: Krsna is pleased with your efforts: He comes… "You… me/we" make no offense… He stays… I personally owe "Hridayananda Maharaja" alot. ( I think of mundane kings being called maharaja. And then I think, "What are they compared to him?") He deserves the title.

Nice quotes. Nice effort. Theist, you are absolved. This was true for Prabhupada because he was the proper recepticle. That may not be true for others. I mean the same can be said of Krsna. But who is realizing Him?

"are you saying that there are no bona fide gurus available?" I basically… No… wholeheartedly agree with Theist on his position here. The standard is liberation. Any deviation from that is offense. Is someone liberated or not? Well, you speculate only to a certain point. But the conclusive knowledge has to come another way. In any case, we all have to decide that for ourselves. Many DID NOT accept Krsna or Prabhupada. They have to live with that. Many accepted false gurus. They have to live with that. A lucky few got the mercy. Prabhupada was such a wonderful example. Maybe too wonderful! Prabhupada seemed to outclass his predecessors. He was the perfect disciple. And because of that, he seemingly showed himself to be more competent than even Lord Caitanya Himself since he was able to distribute KC to the world - not just India. Indeed, he appeared to have the undeniable influence of time itself. Krsna likes to give credit to qualified others as do other awesome authorities. This is certainly bewildering to us that they sometimes prefer to play servant to others. I don't even see a hint of this in the present leadership. They don't acknowledge other's efforts. Quite the opposite… they chased everyone away as not being fit to live among them. And what has been the result of that? What have they achieved? I don't even think they can make competent material calculations. I think they demonstrate the same defects found in the world's leaders. (OOps. Now I've gone too far). I accept the liberation standard and I believe it was present in the parampara preceeding Prabhupada. But I am bewildered as to the seeming limited influence of those personalities when contrasted with Prabhupada. There is no use speculating. It's probably offensive to do so. With our tiny brains, we all look for another Prabhupada… a shinning transparent medium who will expand KC as he did. But even that may not be realistic. We just ASSUME that is what Krsna has planned… perhaps because of Prabhupada's example. For all we know, Krsna may just be plannning to finnish us all off. There's alot of evidence for that. But our ability to read the signs is atrophied, what to speak of understanding them. All we can do is offer our obeisances when we are bound so tight that our options are checked. So - all - please accept my obeisances. HARE Krsna. Reflections of My Life The changing of sunlight to moonlight Reflections of my life, oh, how they fill my eyes The greetings of people in trouble Reflections of my life, oh, how they fill my mind All my sorrows, sad tomorrows Take me back to my own home All my cryings (all my cryings), feel i'm dying, dying Take me back to my own home (oh i'm going home) I'm changing, arranging, I'm changing I'm changing everything, ah, everything around me The world is a bad place, a bad place A terrible place to live, oh, but i don't wanna die All my sorrows.. sad tomorrow Take me back.. to my old home.. All my cryin´...(all my cryin´..) ´ll be my dying dying Take me back.. to my old home.. Repeat to fade – Marmalade

It does appear better to me like this - after seeing it.

Babhru says it's upside down. I can work on it some more. Just let me know.

I thought you might not know how to shrink it so I did it for you. Just drag to your desktop to download and use.

SB 4.17.26 TRANSLATION Any cruel person—be he a man, woman or impotent eunuch—who is only interested in his personal maintenance and has no compassion for other living entities may be killed by the king. Such killing can never be considered actual killing. PURPORT The planet earth is actually a woman in her constitutional form, and as such she needs to be protected by the king. Prthu Maharaja argues, however, that if a citizen within the state—be he man, woman or eunuch—is not compassionate upon his fellow men, he or she may be killed by the king, and such killing is never to be considered actual killing. As far as the field of spiritual activities is concerned, when a devotee is self-satisfied and does not preach the glories of Krsna, he is not considered a first-class devotee. A devotee who tries to preach, who has compassion upon innocent persons who have no knowledge of Krsna, is a superior devotee. In his prayer to the Lord, Prahlada Maharaja said that he was not personally interested in liberation from this material world; rather, he did not wish to be liberated from this material condition until all fallen souls were delivered. Even in the material field, if a person is not interested in others’ welfare, he should be considered to be condemned by the Personality of Godhead or His incarnation like Prthu Maharaja.

This is a whole chapter on David Hume. I know philosophy, but many of these perspectives are unique… A different spin from Prabhupada. ..................................... Hayagriva dasa: Abstract objects, relations, space, time, and matter are all considered by Hume to be mind-dependent perceptions. For Him, perceptions or impressions are all there is. He rejected revealed religion, which he considered dogmatic, and “accepted natural religion” instead, a religion wherein the existence of God can be proved or even shown to be probable by argument and reason. According to Hume, we really know nothing of God: at the most we can know only are of peoples’ ideas of God, and these are but perceptions. Srila Prabhupada: What is that natural religion? Hayagriva dasa: Hume writes : “The whole course of nature raises one hymn to the praises of its creator. I have found a Deity, and here I stop my inquiry. Let those go further who are wiser or more enterprising.” Srila Prabhupada: He admits that the senses are imperfect, and at the same time that there is a God. Now, if our senses are imperfect, how can we imagine God to be like this or that? If God explains Himself, why should we not accept His version? Hayagriva dasa: In Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Hume opposes the search for God in the ideal world. He writes: “Why not stop at the material world? How can we satisfy ourselves without going on ad infinitum?… If the material world rests upon a similar ideal world, this ideal world must reast upon some other, and so on without end. it were better, therefore, never to look beyond the present material world. By supposing it to contain the principle of its order within itself, we really assert it to be god, and the sooner we arrive at the divine being, so much the better. When you go one step beyond the mundane system, you only excite an inquisitive humor which it is impossible ever to satisfy.” Srila Prabhupada: The material world by definition is full of miseries, and those who are advanced therefore search for another world where there is no misery. Everyone is searching for a happy world that is permanent, and that search is not unnatural. There is such a world, and since it exists, why should we not hanker after it? If we lok at the world objectively,k we can see that no one is really happy-that is, unless he is an animal. Animals do not know what is happiness or distress. they remain satisfied in any condition. A man, however, feels pain more acutely. Hayagriva dasa: Hume felt that the sooner we find God the better, and therefore he opposed going beyond the mundane system in search of Him. Srila Prabhupada: You cannot find God in your present conditional state. You may glimpse the fact that there is God, but you cannot understand His forms and pastimes by speculation. Therefore revelation is there for those fortunate people who are seriously searching for God. God is living within, and when we are serious, He reveals Himself. It is also possible to learn about God directly from a person who knows God. Bhagavad-gita is God's direct revelation, and if we try to understand it, we can understand what God is. Syamasundara dasa: Hume maintains that all that we are, all that we know, is merely a sequence of ideas. Srila Prabhupada: But behind the ideas there must be a fact. Otherwise, how can we have the ideas? Syamasundara dasa: He separates facts from ideas. For instance, I may thiink that this table is red, but I may be wrong; it could be brown. Srila Prabhupada: Your idea may be incorrect, but actually the table has some color, be it red, yellow, or whatever. If you have some eye disease, you cannot determine the color, but one whole eyes are not diseased can tell you. Because our eyes are diseased and we cannot see things properly, we have to receive knowledge from one who is not diseased. Hume is wrong when he says that there is no possibility of attaining right knowledge. Syamasundara dasa: He admits that the external world is full of concrete objects, but he thinks that we are also one of those objects because the self is “nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with inconceivable rapidity and are in a perpetual flux and movement.” Our consciousness is composed of only our observations of material nature. Srila Prabhupada: That is so far as direct perception is concerned, but indirect perception is different. It may be taken drom authorities. Syamasundara dasa: Humme distrusts all authority. For him, the only certainty is found in mathematical proofs and immediate sense perceptions. We can perceive tha there is time and space, but this is the only knowledge that he will admit. Srila Prabhupada: And beyond time and space? Syamasundara dasa: We cannot know anything. Srila Prabhupada: Perhaps you cannot, but there is a process whereby we can know. We cannnot say that beyond the mind there is no time or perception. There are insects that are born in the evening and die in the morning, and during that time they experience a lifespan. For a man, this is only twelve hours of life, but the insect cannot live beyond that time. From Bhagavad-gita we understand that Brahma lives for many thousands of years, and that compared to him we are like insects. Everything is relative: our lifespan, knowledge, and perception. We are small human beings, and what is impossible for us is not necessary impossible for others. Hume is talking from the relative platform. Syamasundara dasa: He believes that objects are only relative, not that there is anything absolute. Srila Prabhupada: But as soon as he speaks of relative, he posits the existence of the absolute. If there is no absolute, how can we have the conception of an object being relative? Syamasundara dasa: He believes that things exist only in relation to one another. Srila Prabhupada: Then what is the supreme relation? Syamasundara dasa: He doesn't admit one. Srila Prabhupada: According to logic, at the end of all relative truths there is Absolute Truth, the summum bonum. But if Hume denies substance, he has no idea of the summum bonum, the ultimate substance. Syamasundara dasa: Hume says that an object like an apple consists only of certain sensory qualities, like sweetness or color, and that the individual consists of only a series of mental activities, not of a soul capable of creating experiences. Srila Prabhupada: Inert objects have certain qualities, but the living entity possesses senses by which he can appreciate those qualities. He is therefore superior to inert matter. Because the living entity has senses, he can appreciate sense objects. We have eyes with which we can see color and perceive beauty. Hayagriva dasa: Hume is famous for his skepticism. He rejected revealed scriptures and looked toward science instead. Srila Prabhupada: If he preaches skepticism, why should we believe his words? If he does not believe the statements of others, why should others accept his statements? Syamasundara dasa: Hume postulates three laws whereby perceptions are associated or connected with one another. First, according to his principle of resemblance, a pictue, for instance, makes us think of the original. Secondly, according to the principle of contiguiry, if I mention a room in this building, I think of other rooms also. Third, according to the principle of cause and effect, if I think of a wound, I automatically think of pain. thus he suggest that our whole being consists of such a stream of ideas and associations, which follow one another perpetually. Srila Prabhupada: This is the nature of the relative world. We cannot understand what a father is without understanding what a son is. We cannot conceive of a husband without a wife. Syamasundara dasa: Hume denies the existence of an ultimate reality, asserting that only the phenomena of the senses exists. Srila Prabhupada: But where do these phenomena come from? If htere are phenomena, there must be noumena. Syamasundara dasa: Hume suggests that it is possible that the world has existed since eternity and that therefore no first cause is required. Srila Prabhupada: But what about the manifestation of past, present, and future? Why does death take place if there is no cause? Syamasundara dasa: The body is like a machine which is born and dies. Srila Prabhupada: When you say machine, you are automatically presuppose the beginning of the machine. In other words, the machine must be made by someone. Syamasundara dasa: The machines may be like the seasons. They may come and go. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, they may come and go, and then come again, but what is the meaning of this? Syamasundara dasa: They may be eternally existing facts without cause or creator. Hume says that we may believe in a creator if we like, but this is based on mere probability, not knowledge. We may think as we like. Srila Prabhupada: Well, he goes on talking as he likes. In other words, you can speak all kinds of nonsense, and I can too. You are right, and I am right, and everything is right. Syamasundara dasa: Hume divided human understanding into two categories: relationships among ideas and relationships among facts. The first involves mathematics. Two plus two equals four is true whether it refers to something existing in nature or not. According to the relationships among facts, this is a knowledge to be assumed on the basis of sense experience. According to the information we have based on sense perceptions, we believe tha tthe sun will rise tomorrow. However, there is a possibility that the world will end, and the sun will not rise tomorrow. Srila Prabhupada: Why is this so? Who makes this possible or impossible. the sun may rise, or the sun may not rise. Is this accidental, or is this accoreding to someone's will? Syamasundara dasa: Hume would say that it is accidental. Srila Prabhupada: Nothing is accidental. Everything is symmetrical. According to Krsna in Bhagavad-gita , everything in nature is working under His direction. The sun rises because God has so ordained it. If God does not ordain it, the sun will not rise. It is not accidental at all. Syamasundara dasa: Hume denies casue and effect relationships. We associate friction with heat, but he says that it is a mistake to assume that friction causes heat. For him, there is merely a repetition of two incidents. The effect may habitually attend the casue, but it is not necessarily its consequence. There is only association, not cause and effect. Srila Prabhupada: But who made the laws of association? The association may be accidental, but as soon as there is friction, there is heat. This means that in nature there is a systematic law. Syamasundara dasa: Hume would say that this law is not ultimate reality but mere probability. Srila Prabhupada: Nonetheless, there are physical laws. The sequence of these laws may differ because they are created by someone who can change them. A legislature may assemble today and pass a certain law, but tomorrow it may assemble again and nullify that law. Similarly, a supreme will makes these laws, and He can nullify or chage them. As far as you are concerned, when there is friction, there is heat. It is not that we can rub our hands together without experiencing a sensation of heat. This means that we are subject to the supreme will. God gives us a chance to speak all kinds of nonsense, but He can stop us immediately. At any instant, our tongue may be in a dead body. The supreme will gives us the freedom to talk in this way or that, and concoct all kinds of philosophies, but at any moment He can put an end to all of this. Thus the supreme will is the ultimate cause of all causes. Syamasundara dasa: Hume rejected the idea of absolute matter and the conception of the soul as a substance. He also rejected the utility of scientific laws and moral principles as objective realitites. He claims that all religious ideas are relative, maintaining that there is no certainty in religious matters. Srila Prabhupada: Religion means love of God, and there are different religious processes. If we ultimately develop love of God, we have realized the first and most important factor of religion. If love of God is absent, what passes for religion is not really religion. It is simply a show. Syamasundara dasa: Hume states that even the idea of God is merely probable but not certain. Srila Prabhupada: We do not agree to that. As soon as we speak of authority, we posit the existence of a supreme authority. We call that supreme authority God. Syamasundara dasa: Hume would say that we would have to accept the authority of our senses. Srila Prabhupada: The senses are imperfect, and God is beyond the senses. We cannot see God, touch Him, or hear Hiim becasue our senses are imperfect. A man with imperfect senses say that there is no God, but those who have cleansed their senses can see God, touch Him, and talk with Him. Syamasundara dasa: Hume denies the existence of miracles. Srila Prabhupada: One thng may be a miracle for one person and no for another. An electric fan may seem like a miracle for a blind child, but not for his father. So our conception of miracles is also relative. Hayagriva dasa: On this subject, Hume writes: “All the new discoveries in astronomy, which prove the immense grandeur and magnificence of the works of nature, are so many additional arguments for a Deity, according to the true system of theism.” In this way, Hume rejects the necessity or desirability of miracles as well as the conception of a God transcendental to His creation. He states that it is not the being of God that is in question, but God's nature, which cannot be ascertained through study of the universe itself. However, if the universe can only be studied by imperfect senses, what is the value of our conclusion? How can we ever come to know the nature of God? Srila Prabhupada: According to our Vedic philosophy, the nature of God can be explained by God Himself. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna tells Arjuna: mattah parataram nanyat kincid asti dhananjaya mayi sarvam idam protam sutre mani-gana iva O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread. (Bg. 7.7) We accept this as a fact, becasue it is not possible for anyone to be greater than God. It is god's nature to be the greatest in everything: wealth, fame, power, beauty, knowledge, and renunciation. If we can find one who is garnished with such greatness, we have found God. These qualities are found in Krsna, and therefore we accept Krsna as the Supreme Lord. Hayagriva dasa: In Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Hume writes: “All religious systems, it is confessed, are subject to great and insuperable difficulties. Each disputant triumphs in his turn, while he carries on an offensive war and exposes the absurdities, barbarities and pernicious tenets of his antagonists. but all of them, on the whole, prepare a complete triumph for the skeptic, who tells them that no system ought ever be embraced… A total suspense of judgement is here our only reasonable recourse” Srila Prabhupada: We do not accept this. We believe that we can know God from God Himself. Religion refers to the principles given by God. If there are no directions given by God, there is no religion. Religion is not a kind of blind faith; it is factual becasue it is given by God Himself. If you know God and follow His instructions, you are religious. Hayagriva dasa: Hume did believe that religion is necessary. He says that religion, however corrupted, is still better than no religion at all. Srila Prabhupada: We agree to that, but religion without philosophy and logic is simply sentiment. That will not help us. Real religion is given by Sri Krsna. man-mana bhava mad-bhakto mad-yaji mam namaskuru mam evaisyasi yuktvaivam atmanam mat-parayanah “Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, offer obeisances and worship Me. Being completely absorbed in Me, surely you will come to Me.” (Bg. 9.34) If we always think of God, we will become purified. Religion means meditating upon God and thinking of Him. Therefore temple worship is necessary to facilitate our constantly thinking of God. But if we do not know of God's form, how can we offer Him worship? How can we think of Him? We then have to construct a pseudo religion, and this kind of religion will not help us. Hayagriva: Hume's conception of religion is utilitarian and social. he writes: “The proper office of religion is to regulate the heart of man, humanize their conduct, infuse the spirit of temperance, order and obedience… ” Srila Prabhupada: We also say that religion is the greatest welfare work for all humanity. For instance, religion forbids illicit sex, and if people indulge in illicit sex, society will become chaotic. If we continue eating meat, we revolt against God's will because God is the father of all living entities. When other foods are available, why should we kill animals to eat meat? When there is a wife, why should men have illicit sex? A religious man is necessarily a man of good character. If we are God conscious, all good qualities are automatically manifest. A devotee can sacrifice his own interests because he is a devotee. Others cannot do this. Hayagriva dasa: Hume felt that one must first be a philosophical skeptic before accepting the revealed truths of religion. Ultimately, he insists that these truths can be accepted only on faith, not experience or reason. Srila Prabhupada: Why not on reason? We can use our reason to consider that everything has some proprietor and that it is quite reasonable that this vast universe also has a proprietor. Is there a fault in this logic? Of course, now astronomers are saying that in the beginning there was a chunk, but where did that chunk come from? Where did gas come from? Where did fire come from? There is a proprietor, and He is described in Bhagavad-gita. Mayadhyaksena prakrtih (Bg. 9.10). It is completely illogical to think that there is no universal proprietor. Hayagriva dasa: As far as we can ascertain, Hume personally had no religion, no faith in the Christian or any other God. He also rejected the contention that argument or reason could justify a faith. He is a skeptic who denies the possibility of attaining certainty outside of a mere sequence of perceptions or ideas. Srila Prabhupada: In other words, all statements are to be rejected except his. Hayagriva dasa: Well, he claims that man cannot know ultimate reality or posses knowledge of anything beyond a mere awareness of phenomenal, sensory images. Srila Prabhupada: If man cannot passes knowledge, why should we accept Hume's knowledge? It is better to stop the search for knowledge altogether, is it not? why does Hume bother to write so many books? He is simply trying to set up his own system as supreme. but a skeptic has no foundation for anything. Syamasundara dasa: Hume says that if we like, we can attribute the order and design of the world to an architect, but as far as he is concerned, there is no proof that a supreior architect exists. Srila Prabhupada: If something is artistic and systematic, we must admit that there is some intelligence behind it. We have no other experience. According to our experience, things do not work well without some brain behind them. When we see that the cosmic manifestation is systematic, we must admit that there is a guiding intelligence. Syamasundara dasa: He feels that if such an architect exists, he must be responsible for evil in nature. He therefore concludes that God is either finite or imperfect. If He were perfect, there would be no evil, and if He were infinite in power, He could eliminate it. Srila Prabhupada: God is absolute, and for Him there is no evil. For Him, there is only good, otherwise he could not be called absolute. What we think is evil, is good to God. A father may slap his child, and that child may cry. For the child, this is evil, but for the father, this is good, because he thinks, “I have done right. Although he is crying, he will not commit this same mistake again.” Chastisement may sometimes appear evil, but that is relative to our position. Whose opinion are we to take? Syamasundara dasa: Hume would say that this means God is limited. Srila Prabhupada: That is nonsense. If God is limited, He cannot be God. Syamasundara dasa: The logic is that God must be limited in His goodness to allow evil to exist. Srila Prabhupada: God is ultimately good. Syamasundara dasa: Then God must be limited in His power becasue He cannot eliminate evil. Srila Prabhupada: No. Evil works under His guidance. god controls both good and evil; therefore he is called the supreme controller. He is not limited in any way. The exact word used in Sanskrit isananta, unlimited. god is advaitam acyutam: nondual, infallible, and unlimited. Syamasundara dasa: Concerning world morality, Hume maintains that morality consists of values formulated by the individual for himself as a matter ofpersonal opinion. Each man may do as his conscience dictates. Srila Prabhupada: One man may say that his conscience dictates this, and another that his conscience dictates something else. Therefore there is no agreement. Syamasundara dasa: However, in society, Hume would say that moral values are relative to public opinion. Srila Prabhupada: Then we have to accept the opinion of the majority. This is democracy. Syamasundara dasa: Yet Hume admits that it is up to the individual whether to accept public opinion or reject it. Although the law is there, and society agrees to it, it is still up to the individual to follow it or not. Srila Prabhupada: If you do not follow the law, you will be punished by the state. So we can conclude that independent thinking is not absolute. It is also relative. Syamasundara dasa: Hume would say that it is not logic or reason that determines morality, but sentitment. Srila Prabhupada: We cannot decide what is moral or immoral. Only the supreme will can decide that. Syamasundara dasa: It is the sentitment of the individual that decides. A person should act according to the way he feels at the moment, according to the way he feels at the moment, according to his personal opinion. Srila Prabhupada: You may be satisfied with your personal opinion, but if it is not approved by others in society, you are living in a fool's paradise. Syamasundara dasa: the remedy for this is social. We should try to change the laws or op0inions of the state so that they will comply with a certain type of morality. If I think that something is right, but the state says that it is wrong, I should act politically to change it. Srila Prabhupada: But public opinion and individual opinion are not final. Above them is the supreme will of Krsna, and that ultimately determines what is moral or immoral. Syamasundara dasa: Hume believed that moral sentiments enhance the social good, whereas immoral attitudes are egotistic and anti-social. Srila Prabhupada: In any case, for his the social body is the authority. Ultimately, we have to depend on some authority for all sanction. We propose that the supreme authority is Krsna, and that whatever He sanctions is moral, and whatever He does not sanction is immoral. Arjuna was thinking that it was moral to be nonviolent on the battlefield of Kuruksetra, but Krsna told him otherwise. Instead of depending on the social, political, or communal body to determine morality, we should depend on the supreme will of the supreme authority. We maintain that all morality is relative to Krsna's sanction. Killing is considered immoral, but because Krsna ordered Arjuna to fight, Arjuna's killing was not immoral. If our acts are not approved by the supreme authority, we are immoral. Morality and immorality have no fixed position. When something is approved by Krsna, it is moral., Thus what is considered immoral may actually be moral, and vice berse, depending on the orders or desires of Krsna. In a war, a soldier may kill many human being and be awarded many medals for this, but if he kills one person when he returns home, he is considered immoral, and he is hanged. Even on the mundane platform, morality and immorality depend on the sanction of the state. The state says, “It is moral that you kill this man because he is an enemy.” and the state also says, “If you kill, you will be hanged.” In this way, people accept authority. Everything in the universe depends on Krsna's will, on His authority. In the beginning of Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says that He comes to reestablish religious principles (Bg. 4.8), but at the conclusion He states that one should reject all religious principles and simply surrender unto Him and accept His order (Bg. 18.66). This is the confidential teaching of Bhagavad-gita. In any case, he is the ultimate authority, and surrender unto Him is the ultimate religious principle. Syamasundara dasa: Hume lays the groundwork for permissiveness in modern society becsue he leaves it up to the infividual to choose a specific ethical attitude. In other words, to do as he pleases. Srila Prabhupada: But this is not possible becasue no one can do as he pleases. In life, there are many stumbling clocks. A person may propose a certain action, but his proposal may not be preactical. We cannot act independently. Otherwise, there will be chaos. There must be some authority.

I hate to see ya'll fight. I know how it feels. (I think there's too much agreement between us to fight). Hey, I read your posts more than once too! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

"BTW too bad you skip Krsna's posts. I really enjoy them." Yeah, I notice you talk to people I don't. That's ok with me. We all have different experiences and intent… doesn't have to necessarily agree with mine. My experience may not be right for you (visa-versa). I'm looking out for myself with my policies. No one else is gonna do it.

Hayagriva dasa: Hume is famous for his skepticism. He rejected revealed scriptures and looked toward science instead. Srila Prabhupada: If he preaches skepticism, why should we believe his words? If he does not believe the statements of others, why should others accept his statements? Syamasundara dasa: Hume postulates three laws whereby perceptions are associated or connected with one another. First, according to his principle of resemblance, a pictue, for instance, makes us think of the original. Secondly, according to the principle of contiguiry, if I mention a room in this building, I think of other rooms also. Third, according to the principle of cause and effect, if I think of a wound, I automatically think of pain. thus he suggest that our whole being consists of such a stream of ideas and associations, which follow one another perpetually. Srila Prabhupada: This is the nature of the relative world. We cannot understand what a father is without understanding what a son is. We cannot conceive of a husband without a wife. Syamasundara dasa: Hume denies the existence of an ultimate reality, asserting that only the phenomena of the senses exists. Srila Prabhupada: But where do these phenomena come from? If htere are phenomena, there must be noumena. Syamasundara dasa: Hume suggests that it is possible that the world has existed since eternity and that therefore no first cause is required. Srila Prabhupada: But what about the manifestation of past, present, and future? Why does death take place if there is no cause? Syamasundara dasa: The body is like a machine which is born and dies. Srila Prabhupada: When you say machine, you are automatically presuppose the beginning of the machine. In other words, the machine must be made by someone. Syamasundara dasa: The machines may be like the seasons. They may come and go. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, they may come and go, and then come again, but what is the meaning of this? Syamasundara dasa: They may be eternally existing facts without cause or creator. Hume says that we may believe in a creator if we like, but this is based on mere probability, not knowledge. We may think as we like. Srila Prabhupada: Well, he goes on talking as he likes. In other words, you can speak all kinds of nonsense, and I can too. You are right, and I am right, and everything is right.

Syamasundara dasa: There is an inherent tendency in men to want to experience something first hand rather than through someone else. Srila Prabhupada: From the beginning of our lives, we are experiencing things through authority. A child receives experience by asking his parents. A child knows nothing about fire, and he wants to touch it because it is red. However, he receives knowledge from his parents that he shouldn't touch fire. In this way, he comes to understand certain basic laws of nature. The Vedas tell us that in order to know the transcendental science of Krsna, we must approach a guru. We cannot speculate about God, the spiritual world, and spiritual life.

Now that you ask. I'm trying to figure out how I got that impression. I think I was lead by your title and the use of the Vrndavan word in the first sentence. I missed the memorial post above when I posted my sentiment, but then it doesn't say either, does it? My mind is a blank when I try to remember exactly what I was thinking when I made that last post. Sorry. I didn't read the original post - if it is there. (I didn't read the original post on the literal scripture thread either you mentioned. I don't read Krsna's posts - or alot of them actually. I just know the subject by those I respond to). I can get pretty spacey sometimes. I just assume he left Berekely with Narayan Maharaja and traveled with him… since that was the last time I saw him. And assumed his godbrothers took him to Vrndavan 'cause he had a little warning of impending death. So much for my assumptions. Did you go the the gathering above? I didn't know about it - or I would like to have gone.

Well, he got his wish. Just dying in Vrndavan alone is totally auspicious. Sounds like he got alot of facility at the end… hooking up with Narayana Maharaja and ending up there. I certainly envy him dying there.

I read newspaper headlines that said he "stopped short of an apology"… "part of the headline" I said. (But now an apology would solve everything). I'm more than willing to forgive an agressor for stealing and killing and God knows what else… if they're sorry. (He IS f_cking SORRY alright. Never thought any different. Never had me fooled. I know he's retarded too… tooooOo much cocaine).

SB 12.9.14 PURPORT Here the word catur-vidham refers to the four sources of birth for conditioned souls: embryos, eggs, seeds and perspiration. What is this perspiration? .................................... SB 12.10.28 TEXT 28 Sri Markandeya said: It is indeed most difficult for embodied souls to understand the pastimes of the universal controllers, for such lords bow down to and offer praise to the very living beings they rule. SB 12.10.29 TEXT 29 Generally it is to induce embodied souls to accept religious principles that the authorized teachers of religion exhibit ideal behavior while encouraging and praising the proper behavior of others. SB 12.10.30 TEXT 30 This apparent humility is simply a show of mercy. Such behavior of the Supreme Lord and His personal associates, which the Lord effects by His own bewildering potency, does not spoil His power any more than a magician’s powers are diminished by his exhibition of tricks. .................................... SB 12.10.39 TEXT 39 Markandeya Åsi, the best of the descendants of Bhrgu, is glorious because of his achievement of perfection in mystic yoga. Even today he travels about this world, fully absorbed in unalloyed devotion for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He travels about this world now?

You suggesting if you shrink it you loose detail? I'd like to help if I can. I'll suggest taking the text out and leave the graphics. Then it will shrink down nicely. Even the inside triangles will shrink down nicely without the text. (But you may want the text). Or just find something more suitable. What is that symbol?

Syamasundara dasa: Locke also say that all men are born free and equal in the state of nature and that they have formed a social contract; therefore the government must be based on and subject to the mutual concent of all the citizens. Srila Prabhupada: That agreement can be reached when everyone is situated on the spiritual platform. On the material platform, people are subject to the three modes of material nature: goodness, passion, and ignorance. How can the vote of a God conscious man and the vote of a drunkard be equal? Equality is not possible unless everyone comes to the spiritual platform. Syamasundara dasa: Is it true that all men are born free and equal? Srila Prabhupada: yes, that is a fact. If we are not free, how can we commit sin? Committing sin means that we have the freedom to commit sins. And equality means that we all have small independence. We are equal in the sense that we can properly utilize or misuse our independence. Because we all have independence, we are equal. If we misuse it, we go downward, and if we use it properly, we go upward. In the use of our independence, we have equal rights.

Syamasundara dasa: According to Locke's utilitarian ethic, happiness is the greatest good, and obedience to the moral law results in happiness. Srila Prabhupada: But the difficulty is that here in this material world, happiness is temporary. And even if we follow moral laws, other people will give us trouble. there are people who don't care whether you are moral or immoral. Bhagavad-gita confirms that this is not a place of happiness. duhkhalayam asasvatam. “This temporary world is full of miseries.” (Bg. 8.15) therefore we have to find where real happiness ixists. That is the spiritual world. Happiness here is only another illusiion. It is not possible. If Krsna Himself says that this is a place of misery, how can we find happiness here? In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna speaks of real happiness: sukham atyantikam yat tad buddhi-grahyam atindriyam vetti yatra na caivayam sthitas calati tattvatah “In that joyous state, one is situated in boundless transcendental happiness, and enjoys himself through transcendental senses. Established thus, one never departs from the truth, and upon gaining this, he thinks there is no greater gain.” (Bg. 6.21) Real happiness is beyond the senses. It is atindriyya. In other words, we have to purify our senses in order to attain it. The is also confirmed by Åsabhadeva: nayam deho deha-bhajam nrloke kastan kaman arhate vid-bhujam ye tapo divyam putraka yena sattvam suddhyed yasmad brahma-saukhyam tv anantam “Of all the living entities who have accepted material bodies in this world, one who has been awarded this human form should not work hard day and night for sense gratification, which is available even for dogs and hogs that eat stool. One should engage in penance and austerity to attain the divine position of devotional service. By such activity, one’s heart is purified, and when one attains this position, he attains eternal, blissful life, which is transcendental to material happiness and which continues forever.” (Bhag 5.5.1) Presently, our existence is impure. If a man is suffering from jaundice, he tastes sweet things as bitter. In order to taste real happiness, we hace to purify our senses. Materialists think that as soon as they have sexual intercourse, they will be happy, but that is not real happiness. We cannot even enjoy that happiness. The conclusion is that we should not seek happiness like cats, dogs, and hogs, but as human beings. This means tapasya, purification of the senses. First we must be cured of this material disease, then we can taste real happiness in our healthy life. A sane man knows that he is spirit soul covered by a material coating. So let this coating be washed away by devotional service. Tat-paratvena nirmalam (Narada-pancaratra). When we engage in devotional service, we remove the false coating, and our real sense emerge. We enjoy those real senses by by serving Krsna.

Syamasundara dasa: He states that values must obey the will of God as expressed in natural law, the laws upon which men agree, such as social contracts, and the established traditions, custons, and opinions of mankind. He state that our laws must be obeyed in such a way that we will exist in harmony. Srila Prabhupada: And what is that harmony? Perfect harmony is in knowing that we are part and parcel of God. In this body, there are different parts, and each part has a particular function. When each part performs its function, the body is harmonious. The hand is meant for touching, lifting, and grasping, but if the hand say, “I shall walk,” there is disharmony. Being part and parcel of God, we have a particular function. If we fulfill that function, there is harmony. If we do not, there is disharmony. The law of nature means working in harmony with the desire of God. mayadhyaksena prakrtih suyate sa-caracaram hetunanena kaunteya jagad viparivartate “This material nature is working under My direction, O son of Kunti, and it is producing all moving and unmoving beings. By its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again.” (Bg. 9.10) Under Krsna's superintendence, everything is functioning in harmony. Events do not happen blindly. In any organization, there is a supreme authority under whose orders everything moves in harmony. Harmony means that there must be some supreme superintendent. It is generally said that obedience is the first law of discipline. There cannot be harmony without obedience. Syamasundara dasa: Locke would say that we have to obey the laws of nature. Srila Prabhupada: Everyone is obeying the laws of nature. Yasyajnaya bhramati. Brahma-samhita (5.52) states that the sun is moving in its orbit fixed by the law of Govinda. The ocean has certain limitations fixed by the Supreme. All nature is functioning according to the law of God. Syamasundara dasa: Locke believes that we must also obey the laws upon which we agree, that is, the social contract. Srila Prabhupada: This is the law: We must surrender to Krsna. When we agree to the laws of the Supreme, that is religion. Syamasundara dasa: Men agree socially not to steal one another's property, or to kill one another. Shouldn't we obey these laws of man? Srila Prabhupada: Men's laws are imitations of God's laws. God's law states: isavasyam idam sarvam. “Everything animate or inanimate that is with the universe is controlled and owned by the Lord.” (†sopanisad 1) Every living entity is the son of God, and he has the right to live at the cost of God. Everyone is eating food supplied by God. The animals are eating their food. The cow is eating grass, but why should we kill the cow? This is against God's law. We have rice, grains, fruits, vegetables, and so on. These are for us. Tigers do not come to eat our fruits or grains, so why should we kill tigers? A tiger is not encroaching upon our rights.